I don't understand the prejudice against cell phone cameras. They are cameras. Lens, shutter, viewfinder, etc.
I think those who don't like them are being Luddites or have some issues of self-esteem.
Just because they are built into a multi-function device doesn't make them inferior or any less of a camera.
I'm as much of a vintage camera nut as anyone else here (if you follow my other posts and threads. I like shooting with Leicas, Nikon rangefinders and Hansa Canons, etc as well as phones)
This is the same kind of talk that large format camera users hurled at Leica adopters in the early 1930's. "Not a real camera". "Toys". "Only for snapshots". "Small film format not capable of taking sharp photos"."The miniature camera cannot create art", etc. etc etc. The vitriol and controversy was endless.
If you read the old photo magazines of the era, it is quite enlightening.
It took WWII and the explosion of combat photography to finally kill that debate.
Actually, smartphones are the spiritual descendants of the original Leica. The Leica was loved because you could always have it with you, it was small and fit in a pocket, you could mostly "set it and forget it". It brought photography to the masses. In other words, a smartphone. Today, EVERYTHING is recorded. A tsunami of images. Good or bad, that is the de facto state of photography today.
In reality, what is wrong with smartphone cameras? Someone give me a valid and logical argument for poo-pooing them.
* With any modern digicam, you are not "making" pictures, you are "taking them". They are all very powerful little computers with a lens attached.
(and I bet you hate emojis too!!)